Systematic Notes on Asian Birds. 35. Types of the Aegithinidae

ZV-344 017-024 | 35 05-01-2007 07:43 Page 17

Systematic notes on Asian birds. 35. Types of the Aegithinidae

E.C. Dickinson, R.W.R.J. Dekker, S. Eck & S. Somadikarta

With contributions by C. Voisin & J.-F. Voisin

Dickinson, E.C., R.W.R.J. Dekker, S. Eck & S. Somadikarta. Systematic notes on Asian birds. 35. Types of the Aegithinidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden 344, 12.ix.2003: 17-24.— ISSN 0024-1652/ISBN 90-73239-88-5. Edward C. Dickinson, c/o The Trust for Oriental Ornithology, Flat 3, Bolsover Court, 19 Bolsover Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex, BN20 7JG, U.K. (e-mail: [email protected]). René W.R.J. Dekker, National Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands. (e-mail: [email protected]). Siegfried Eck, Staatliche Naturhistorische Sammlungen Dresden, Museum für Tierkunde, A.B. Meyer Bau, Königsbrücker Landstrasse 159, D-01109 Dresden, Germany. (e-mail: [email protected]). Soekarja Somadikarta, Dept. of Biology, Faculty of Science and Mathematics, University of Indonesia, Depok Campus, Depok 16424, Indonesia. (e-mail: [email protected]). Claire & Jean-François Voisin, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Laboratoire de Zoologie, Mam- mifères et Oiseaux, 55 Rue de Buffon, F-75005 Paris, France. (e-mail: [email protected]).

Keywords: Aegithinidae; iora; types. A list of about 35 names applied to species of iora (family Aegithinidae) is presented. This list also provides information on the whereabouts of a type. Where our information does not include reliable data we provide notes to explain the deficit and to stimulate others to offer additional data or sources of information.

Introduction

In ‘Systematic notes on Asian birds. 3. Types of the Eurylaimidae’ (Dekker et al., 2000) we explained the rationale for this comprehensive set of articles on the types of Asian birds. Readers are referred to that paper for a fuller introduction and for more details on methodology.

Methodology

Our table shows the names applied to the taxa, with author(s) and date (the relevant publications being reported in the ‘References’). Where a type or types have been located the acronym of the museum is given. The final column gives the number of a comment. The numbered comments follow the table. The arrangement of the list is by species and within that by subspecies. The sequence of species is that of Delacour (1960) in Peters’s Check-list, but we have followed Cracraft et al. (2003) in recognizing a monophyletic family Aegithinidae. Delacour (1960) placed the genus Aegithina Vieil- lot, 1816, within a broad family Irenidae. The subspecies recognized here differ from those recognized in Peters’s Check-list in two particulars. First, we include all subsequent names of which we are aware: ZV-344 017-024 | 35 05-01-2007 07:43 Page 18

18 Dickinson et al. Types of the Aegithinidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden 344 (2003)

Aegithina tiphia djungkulanensis Hoogerwerf, 1962, and Aegithina tiphia trudiae Prescott, 1970. Second, we apply the decisions made in the accompanying paper on this family (Wells et al., 2003; this issue). We repeat that the views we express in these papers are preliminary. Additional information and suggestions received before the ‘Synopsis’ may lead to modified treatment therein, see Introduction to ‘Systematic notes on Asian birds’ (Dickinson & Dekker, 2000). All names have been checked to the original citation and original spellings are used. In the case of unusual spellings we add the adjunction ‘sic’. As in our reports on Asian types of the Eurylaimidae (Dekker et al., 2000), the Pit- tidae (Dickinson et al., 2000), the Alaudidae (Dickinson et al., 2001) and others in this series, we have investigated all the names that we have found in synonymy, and we listed each such name in our type table. For each one we have explored what was known about the types. A list of acronyms appears before the list of References. Published type catalogues and data provided as part of the original description have remained our main sources, but an increasing community of interested museum curators and collection managers is providing a growing amount of help that is very welcome. In our personal searches for types, which one cannot safely describe as exhaustive, even for the few museums that we have visited, we have been privileged to be able to access and examine type material, as detailed under Acknowledgements. It should not be assumed however that we have re-examined any particular type. We have examined some where we had a particular reason to do so. No significant review of the family or of the genus Aegithina has been published since Delacour (1960). The zoogeography of the family Irenidae sensu Delacour has been examined by Dunn (1974).

The types

Aegithina tiphia A. t. multicolor [Fringilla] multicolor1 J.F. Gmelin 1789 ? 1. Motacilla zeylonica J.F. Gmelin 1789 ? 2. Ægithina quadricolor Vieillot 1816 Plate 3. J[ora]. melaceps2 Swainson 1837 Plate 4. A. t. deignani Aegithina tiphia deignani Hall 1957 BMNH A. t. humei M[otacilla]. Subviridis3 Tickell 1833 ? 5.

1 First reviser in relation to priority over zeylonica: Hume (1877: 432); see also Robinson & Kloss (1923: 563). 2 The generic name was spelled Jora by Horsfield (1821) and corrected by him to Iora in 1824. 3 Apparently not preoccupied, but by now a nomen oblitum. Baker (1930: 70) considered it a synonym of nominate tiphia in spite of its type locality (Bhorabhúm and Dholbhúm [India]) and the range he associ- ated with humei. Hume (1877: 433, 438) did not recognise geographical forms but had, despite admitting uncertainty about the ranges of potential forms, treated subviridis as pertaining “to the tiphia type”. ZV-344 017-024 | 35 05-01-2007 07:43 Page 19

Dickinson et al. Types of the Aegithinidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden 344 (2003) 19

Aegithina tiphia humei E.C.S. Baker 1922 BMNH A. t. tiphia [Motacilla] Tiphia Linnaeus 1758 Plate 6. Sylvia leucoptera4 Vieillot 1807 Plate 7. A. t. septentrionalis Aegithina tiphia septentrionalis Koelz 1939 UMMZ A. t. philipi Aegithina Philipi Oustalet 1885 MNHN Aegithina tiphia styani La Touche 1923 MCZ A. t. cambodiana Aegithina tiphia cambodiana Hall 1957 BMNH A. t. horizoptera Aegithina tiphia horizoptera Oberholser 1912 USNM Aegithina tiphia micromelaena Oberholser 1923 USNM Aegithina tiphia singapurensis Chasen & Kloss 1931 BMNH Aegithina tiphia djungkulanensis Hoogerwerf 1962 RMNH A. t. scapularis Jora scapularis Horsfield 1821 BMNH A. t. viridis J[ora]. viridis “Temm. Mus. Lugd.” Bonaparte5 18506 RMNH Aegithina tiphia damicra Oberholser 1923 USNM Aegithina tiphia zophonota7 Oberholser 1923 USNM A. t. aequanimis Aegithina tiphia aequanimis Bangs 1922 MCZ Aegithina tiphia chaseni Stresemann 1938 ZMB Aegithina tiphia trudiae Prescott 1970 UMMZ

Aegithina nigrolutea8 Iora nigrolutea G.F.L. Marshall 1876 BMNH Aegithina nigrolutea sulfurea Koelz 1954 UMMZ

Aegithina viridissima A. v. viridissima J[ora]. viridissima “Temm. Mus. Lugd.” Bonaparte 18509 RMNH Iora chloroptera Salvadori 1874 Lost 8. Aegithina viridissima nesiotica Oberholser 1912 USNM 9. A. v. thapsina Aegithina viridissima thapsina Oberholser 1917 USNM

4 Hume (1877) argued, on the basis of Stephens’ translation from Vieillot (1807), that Sylvia leucoptera could not be an iora. Sharpe (1882) wrote that ‘no one, however, examining the plate can doubt that this is Iora tiphia …..’ and sustained the generic name Aegithina Vieillot (1816) over Iora Horsfield (1821). 5 Bonaparte here used a MS name that Temminck had attached to a specimen in the museum at Lug- duni (the old Latin name of Leiden). 6 Not 1851 as given by Delacour (1960: 302). 7 Given as zaphonota by Delacour (1960: 302). 8 An emendation to nigrilutea has not come into prevailing usage. 9 Not 1851 as given by Delacour (1960: 302). ZV-344 017-024 | 35 05-01-2007 07:43 Page 20

20 Dickinson et al. Types of the Aegithinidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden 344 (2003)

Aegithina lafresnayei A. l. lafresnayei Iora Lafresnayei Hartlaub 1844 ? 10. Phœnicomanes iora10 Sharpe 1874 BMNH A. l. innotata Iora innotata Blyth 1847 ZSI ? 11. A. l. xanthotis Aethorhynchus xanthotis Sharpe 1882 BMNH

Comments

1. Gmelin’s name multicolor was given to the “Green-rumped Finch” of Latham (1783a: 320), whose description Hume (1877) considered ‘an absolute photograph of the Southern breeding males ….’ and Ceylon was mentioned. In later work Latham (1790, 1821-28) united, or appeared to unite, the ioras of India and Ceylon. Despite this Latham’s earlier descriptions need to be consulted as the details, espe- cially on the geographic origins of the birds, are determinant in conclusions as to their applicability.

2. Gmelin (1789) based his second name, zeylonica11, on the “Ceylon Black cap” which was depicted by Brown (1776: 36, pl. 15)12 and on the “Ceylon Warbler” of Latham (1783b: 474). The descriptions of these two authors, according to Hume (1877), left him in ‘no doubt as to the race which this name was intended to typify’. We are aware of ongoing work by Lex Raat that relates to the drawings of Gideon Loten (which are in the NHM, South Kensington); it is very possible that there is a connec- tion here, but we are not yet in a position to report upon it.

3. Vieillot’s name is based on “le Quadricolor” in Levaillant (1802: Pl. 141).

4. Swainson (1837) gave no description, nor type locality, but gave the ‘indication’ of “O. d’Af. Pl. 141.” It is thus based on the same plate as Vieillot’s name (see comment 3). Swainson’s name was subsequently spelled meliceps by Horsfield (1841).

5. Tickell’s material from India seems to have been presented to the Zoological Society of London whose collection was dispersed in 1854-57 (Wheeler, 1997). This type has not been traced. It will be noted that Tickell’s name is older than humei Baker, 1922; this has been discussed in footnote 2 above.

6. Linnaeus based his name on the Green Indian Flycatcher, well described by Edwards (1747)13, but based not on a black-tailed male. As Hume (1877) pointed out

10 Originally thought to have come from Jamaica. Sharpe (1875) explained the story and why he had found it necessary to correct this. 11 40 pages later. 12 Hume (1877) did not believe that plate number 15 was correct; it appeared to depict ‘the long-tailed dove’, but this plate number is correct. Perhaps different versions exist. 13 Plate 79. Hume (1877) described this figure as ‘a good one … it is clear his specimen was either a female or a young male’. ZV-344 017-024 | 35 05-01-2007 07:43 Page 21

Dickinson et al. Types of the Aegithinidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden 344 (2003) 21

the figure “like the description entirely fails to fix the race” to which the bird depicted belonged. Edwards (1747) mentioned Bengal, and also that a Mr. Dandridge had received the specimen from there. However, as Hume said, this did not satisfactorily prove the origin of the specimen, as the term Bengal was often used very generally. Hume (op. cit.) considered that Latham (1783b: 474) established the validity of Cal- cutta as the type locality of his Green Indian Warbler, which is tiphia Linnaeus, and thus the same as Edwards’s Green Indian Flycatcher. Latham achieved this by providing descriptions of both sexes and reporting the Bengalese name ‘Chatuck’. This has been taken as corroboration of Bengal as the type locality of tiphia and also as a valid restriction of it to Calcutta. Care should be taken over the description of tiphia given in Sharpe (1882); his skins came from Khandala. This is “approximately 110 km SE of Bombay on the main road and rail link to Pune; this is towards the north- ern end of Western Ghats, and also called Shahyadri Hills” at “18°38’N, 73°30E” (Kanwar Singh, pers. comm.) and these specimens ought to represent deignani Hall, 1957, not the nominate form.

7. There seems to be no likelihood that Vieillot’s type is extant. In witness of this, all previous discussion about Sylvia leucoptera has focussed on the plate.

8. The holotype, a female (No. 449) collected in July 1865, is believed to have been in the parcel sent to Lord Walden which was lost (see note 38 in Passerin d’Entrèves et al., 1986: 167).

9. The type locality given as Tana Batu Island by Delacour (1960: 302) is a lapsus for Tana Bala Island.

10. The type was once in Bremen where it carried the number A 5458. It is thought lost following World War II, but a fresh search might reveal it as some other types have been rediscovered (C. Hinkelmann pers. com.).

11. The holotype was a female taken by Capt. Phayre. Blyth (1852: 213) listed such a specimen as in bad order, but Sclater (1892) did not report on a type of this name. No doubt by then the specimen had been discarded.

Summary of types of unknown whereabouts

We would welcome information concerning the types of: [Fringilla] multicolor Gmelin, 178914; Motacilla zeylonica Gmelin, 1789; M[otacilla]. Subviridis Tickell, 1833; Iora Lafresnayei Hartlaub, 1844; and Iora innotata Blyth, 1847.

14 It is generally considered that Gmelin did not examine specimens; types for his name thus derive from the works that he cites and it will rarely be possible to be certain that such very old specimens were actually those before the authors or artists concerned. However, in some cases further research will be rewarded. ZV-344 017-024 | 35 05-01-2007 07:43 Page 22

22 Dickinson et al. Types of the Aegithinidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden 344 (2003)

Acknowledgements

As in our previous work on Asian types we acknowledge a considerable debt to those who have published relevant type catalogues (for references other than those cited as references here see Dickinson et al., 2001) and to those working on current drafts for type catalogues that have been shown to us. Special thanks are due to Robert Prys-Jones, Michael Walters, Burkhard Stephan, Sylke Frahnert, George Barrowclough, Mary LeCroy, Paul Sweet, Sammy Degrave, Victoria Kitchener and Pavel Tomkovich for their help when we have been in their institutions. Michael Walters deserves particular thanks for exploring whether or not the name M[otacilla]. Subviridis Tickell was preoccupied and for double-checking names and bibliographic information to Latham’s various works. Kanwar Singh kindly helped with the exact location of Khandala. Christoph Hinkelmann kindly made information available from a private database on Hartlaub’s types. We are most grateful for the help and patience of Mrs F.E. Warr and Alison Harding of The Natural History Museum, Tring with our library work there and also to Mrs Ann Datta and her colleagues at the Zoology Library, The Natural History Museum, London. Murray Bruce kindly reviewed our list of references and offered helpful suggestions in respect to the text as well. We are extremely grateful to Mary LeCroy, Frank Steinheimer and Michael Walters who have refereed this paper and provided helpful comments.

Acronyms

BMNH The Natural History Museum, Tring - formerly the British Museum (Natural History). MCZ Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard. MNHN Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. RMNH National Museum of Natural History, Leiden - formerly Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie. UMMZ University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor. USNM United States National Museum, Washington DC. ZMB Museum für Naturkunde der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin - formerly Zoologisches Museum, Berlin. ZSI Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta.

References

Baker, E.C.S., 1922. The Fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Birds (2nd edition). 1: i-xxiii, 1-479.— London. Baker, E.C.S., 1930. The Fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Birds (2nd edition). 7: i-viii, 1-484.— London. Bangs, O.C., 1922. Notes on Philippine birds collected by Governor W. Cameron Forbes.— Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. 65(4): 77-84. Blyth, E., 1847. Notices and descriptions of various new or little known species of birds.— J. Asiatic Soc. Bengal 16(185): 428-476. Blyth, E., 1852. Catalogue of the Birds in the Museum [of the] Asiatic Society: i-xxxiv, 1-403.— Calcutta. Bonaparte, C.L., 1850. Conspectus generum avium. 1: 1-543.— Lugduni Batavorum. ZV-344 017-024 | 35 05-01-2007 07:43 Page 23

Dickinson et al. Types of the Aegithinidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden 344 (2003) 23

Brown, P., 1776. New illustrations of Zoology, containing fifty coloured plates of new, curious and non- descript birds, with a few quadrupeds, reptiles and insects. Together with a short description of the same: [i-iv], 1-136.— London. Chasen, F.N. & C.B. Kloss, 1931. Five new Malaysian birds.— Bull. Raffles Mus. 5: 82-86. Cracraft, J., F.K. Barker & A. Cibois, 2003. Avian higher-level phylogenetics and the Howard & Moore checklist of birds: 16-21.— In: E.C. Dickinson (ed.). The Howard & Moore complete checklist of birds of the world (3rd edition). London. Dekker, R.W.R.J., E.C. Dickinson, S. Eck & S. Somadikarta, 2000. Systematic notes on Asian birds. 3. Types of the Eurylaimidae.— Zool.Verh. Leiden 331: 77-88. Delacour, J., 1960. Family Irenidae: 300-308.— In: E. Mayr & J. Greenway Jr. (eds). Check-list of Birds of the World. IX. Cambridge, Mass. Dickinson, E.C. & R.W.R.J. Dekker, 2000. Introduction to Systematic notes on Asian birds.— Zool. Verh. Leiden 331: 5-9. Dickinson, E.C., R.W.R.J. Dekker, S. Eck & S. Somadikarta, 2000. Systematic notes on Asian birds. 5. Types of the Pittidae.— Zool. Verh. Leiden 331: 101-119. Dickinson, E.C., R.W.R.J. Dekker, S. Eck & S. Somadikarta, 2001. Systematic notes on Asian birds. 12. Types of the Alaudidae.— Zool. Verh. Leiden 335: 85-126. Dunn, D.F., 1974. Zoogeography of the Irenidae (Aves: Passeres).— Biotropica 6(3): 165-174. Edwards, G., 1747.15 A Natural History of Birds, most of which have not been figured or described, and others very little known from obscure, or too brief descriptions without figures, or from figures very ill designed: containing the figures of sixty-one birds and two quadrupedes, engrav’d on fifty-three copper plates, after curious original drawings from life, and exactly colour’d. With full and accurate descriptions. To which is added by way of illustration and appendix. 2: i- viii, 53-128 (pl. 153-105 col., 121 pl. uncol.). Gmelin, J-F., 1789. Systema Naturae, per regna tria Natura: secundum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species, cum Characteribus, Differentiis, Synonymis, Locis. 13th edition. Tome 1, pars II: 501-1032.— Lyon. Hall, B.P., 1957. The taxonomic importance of variation in non-breeding plumage in Aegithina tiphia and A. nigrolutea.— Ibis 99: 143-156. Hartlaub, G., 1844. Nouvelles espèces d’oiseaux de l’Inde.— Rev. Zool. 7: 401-403. Hoogerwerf, A., 1962. On Aegithina tiphia (Linn.), the Common Iora from Udjong Kulon, western Java.— Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 82: 160-165. Horsfield, T., 1821. A systematic arrangement and description of birds from the island of Java.— Trans. Linn. Soc. London 13: 133-200. Horsfield, T., 1824. Zoological Researches in Java, and the neighbouring islands. Unpag. 4 vols. — London. Horsfield, T., 1841. List of the Mammalia in the Museum of the East India Company16. Appendix to Despatch from the Court of Directors [of the Hon. East India Company] dated 16th September 1840.— J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal 10: 38-63. Hume, A.O., 1877. Remarks on the Genus Iora.— Stray Feathers 5: 419-452. Koelz, W.N., 1939. New birds from Asia, chiefly from India.— Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 52: 61-82. Koelz, W.N., 1954. Ornithological studies I. New birds from Iran, Afghanistan and India.— Contr. Inst. Reg. Explor. 1: 1-32. Latham, J., 1783a. A general synopsis of birds. 2. Pt. 1: 1-366.— London. Latham, J., 1783b. A general synopsis of birds. 2. Pt. 2: 367-808.— London. Latham, J., 1790. Index ornithologicus, sive systema ornithologiæ; complectens avium divisionem in classes, ordines, genera, species, ipsarumque varietates: adjectis synonymis, locis, descriptionibus, & c. 1: i-xviii, 1-500.— London.

15 In this work the title of each volume varies. There are also copies bound as two volumes and as four volumes. Because of the need, in this series, to relate names to dates the details used here are strictly those of the volume (i.e. not some ‘standardised title’ for the whole book). The details are taken from Zimmer (1926: 192-193). In this instance the version actually consulted, in Tring, was the posthumous reprint of about 1802-1805 (see Zimmer, 1926: 201-202) - although bound in four volumes not two. 16 The author of this list is not actually given but Hume (1877: 429) attributed the name to Horsfield. ZV-344 017-024 | 35 05-01-2007 07:43 Page 24

24 Dickinson et al. Types of the Aegithinidae. Zool. Verh. Leiden 344 (2003)

Latham, J., 1821-28. A general history of birds. 11 vols.— Winchester. La Touche, J.D.D., 1923. [Birds lately received from Mr. E.P. Laurente of Szemao in South Yunnan.].— Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 43: 172-174. Levaillant, F., 180217. Histoire naturelle des Oiseaux d’Afrique. 3: 1-144, pls. 98-150.— Paris. Linnaeus, C., 1758. Systema Naturae per regna tria Naturae, secundum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species, cum Characteribus, Differentiis, Synonymis, Locis. 10th edition. 1: 1-823.— Holmiae. Marshall, G.F.L., 1876. A new Indian Iora.— Stray Feathers 4(4-6): 410-413. Oberholser, H.C., 1912. Descriptions of one hundred and four new species and subspecies of birds from the Barussan islands and Sumatra.— Smiths. Misc. Coll. 60(7): 1-22. Oberholser, H.C., 1917. The birds of the Anamba Islands.— U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 98: i-vi, 1-75. Oberholser, H.C., 1923. Descriptions of new East Indian birds of the families Turdidae, Sylviidae, Pycnonotidae and Muscicapidae.— Smiths. Misc. Coll. 76(6): 1-9. Oustalet, J.-F.E., 1885. Notices sur quelques espèces nouvelles ou peu connues de la collection ornithologique du Muséum.— Nouv. Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat. Paris 2(8): 255-306. Passerin d’Entreves, P., A. Rolando & C. Violani, 1986. Tommaso Salvadori nel centocinquantenario della nascita (1835-1923).— Riv. Ital. Orn. Milano 56: 133-171. Prescott, K.W., 1970. A new subspecies of the Common Iora from north Borneo.— Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. 90(2): 39-40. Robinson, H.C. & C.B. Kloss, 1923. Some remarks on Mr. C. Stuart Baker’s new volume on the Birds in the “Fauna of British India”.— J. Proc. Asiatic. Soc. Bengal 18(10) (1922): 559-568. Salvadori, T., 1874. Catalogo sistematico degli uccelli di Borneo.— Ann. Mus. Civ. Stor. Nat. Genova 5: 1-429. Sclater, W.L., 1892. On the Indian Museum and its collection of birds.— Ibis (6)4: 65-87. Sharpe, R.B., 1874. On a new genus and species of bird from the West Indies.— Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond.: 427-428. Sharpe, R.B., 1875. Note on Cossypha pyrrhopygia Hartlaub.— Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (4)16: 236. Sharpe, R.B., 1882. Catalogue of the birds in the British Museum. VI: i-xiii, 1-421 (1881).— London. Stresemann, E., 1938. Vögel vom Fluss Kajan (Nordost-Borneo) gesammelt von Baron Victor von Plessen.— Temminckia 3: 109-136. Swainson, W., 1837. On the Natural History and Classification of Birds. 2: i-vii, 1-398.— London. Tickell, S.R., 1833. List of birds, collected in the jungles of Borabhúm and Dholbhúm.— J. Asiatic Soc. Bengal 2: 569-583. Vieillot, L.P., 1807. Histoire Naturelle des Oiseaux de l’Amérique Septentrionale, contenant un grand nombre d’espèces decrites ou figurées pour la premier fois. 2: [i]-[ii], I-II, 1-74.— Paris. Vieillot, L.P., 1816. Aegithine: 176-177.— In: L.P. Vieillot, 1816. Nouveau Dictionnaire d’Histoire Naturelle. I: 1 ABA-ANI. 1-552. Paris. Wells, D.R., E.C. Dickinson & R.W.R.J. Dekker, 2003. Systematic notes on Asian birds. 34. A preliminary review of the Aegithinidae.— Zool. Verh. Leiden 344: 7-15. Wheeler, A., 1997. Zoological collections in the early British Museum: the Zoological Society’s Muse- um.— Arch. Nat. Hist. 24(1): 89-126. Zimmer, J.T., 1926. Catalogue of the Edward E. Ayer Ornithological Library.— Field Mus. Nat. Hist., Zool. 16 (1): i-x, 1-364.

Received: 9.v.2003; 12.vi.2003 (final draft) Accepted: 23.vii.2003 Edited: C. van Achterberg

17 It has apparently been suggested that the parts of this volume appeared between 1801 and 1805 and that Pl. 141 and its text appeared in 1804 (M.D. Bruce in litt.). For now we retain the date usually cited for this taxon.